>> other
>> taxonomists (defined, e.g., as anyone who has published at least 5
>> new taxa, at least 90% of which are not considered synonyms - so as
>> not to exclude the many competent "amateurs"), and non-taxonomists
>> were only allowed to *comment*?
As a proud author in an internationally respected peer reviewed
journal of a new plant family that no-one has acknowledged or even
bothered to refer to in the quarter century since it was published, I
can not possibly agree to this.
It is so very tempting it is to launch into wikipedia and wikispecies
in a defiant act of self vindication and self-righteous assertion of
superior judgement. But modesty forbids... :)
jim
--
_________________
Jim Croft
jim.croft at gmail.com
"Words, as is well known, are the great foes of reality."
- Joseph Conrad, author (1857-1924)